You would just assume that figures used to quantify job creation in the United States would refer to jobs held by Americans, wouldn't you? Not so fast. Those numbers don't refer to the number of jobs created for Americans. They're nothing more than an approximation of the number of employees each of those companies has working in the United States. What percentage of those employees are Americans?

The authors of the GIN feature, editor-in-chief Asif Ismail and editor-at-large Sujeet Rajan, cited a CII study, titled "Indian Roots, American Soil: A Look at Indian Companies in the U.S. Economy," to try to make their case. Their aim is to refute the "powerful narrative in American minds about Indian companies, a result of years of campaigning against outsourcing," which is "that they operate in the United States mainly to send jobs back home, or wrench it by hiring cheap labour from India." But anyone who actually takes the time to thoroughly read the article finds that only a small percentage of those jobs created in the United States are actually held by Americans. According to a chart that GIN lifted from the CII study, only 10.3 percent of IT and business process outsourcing jobs created in the United States by Indian companies are held by Americans.

The GIN story goes on to make the legitimate point that Indian companies in other industries here have a much higher percentage of American employees. In the case of health care, for example, the ratio is 98.9 percent local hires. What we don't know is what sort of presence Indian health care companies have in the United States, and what that percentage means in real numbers of jobs for Americans. What we do know is that the GIN story is outrageous. Its entire premise about Indian companies creating jobs in the United States is horribly misleading, because the vast majority of those jobs - about 90 percent in the case of the IT industry, which has by far the largest Indian footprint of any sector here - are held by people from India.

The headline of the original GIN story is, "Here's How India Inc Insources Jobs to America." That's a perfectly legitimate headline for what could have been a legitimate story, because it is certainly the case that there are some jobs that have been insourced to America by Indian companies. Unfortunately, GIN completely misrepresented the facts in attempting to make its case. It refers to job creation in the United States, the natural implication of which is job creation for Americans, when in reality the reference is to jobs created in the United States, only a fraction of which are held by Americans.

But it's worth noting that GIN isn't the only outfit that committed an egregious act here. When The Economic Times in India picked up the story, it changed the headline to the outlandish, "How the Tata Group, Infosys, Wipro & Essar Are the Biggest Job Creators in the U.S.," which was a further distortion of already misrepresented information in the GIN chart. So both media outlets are party to a disservice that the American work force just doesn't need right now. This story is going to be reprinted and forwarded relentlessly, and a lot of nave people are going to believe the absurd notion that Indian companies are the top creators of jobs for Americans.

This sort of shameless, distasteful propagandizing is doing nothing but fueling resentment and distrust among American workers. Those of us who welcome and value globalization, and long for a united humankind that creates more opportunity for people of all nations, are thwarted by this senselessness. This isn't the answer to the backlash in the United States against the abuse of our visa programs. The answer is to stop the abuse.

IT Solutions Builder
TOP IT RESOURCES TO MOVE YOUR BUSINESS FORWARD

Which topic are you interested in?

Mobile

Security

Networks/IoT

Cloud

Data Storage

Applications

Development

IT Management

Other

What is your company size?

What is your job title?

What is your job function?

Searching our resource database to find your matches...

Subscribe to our Newsletters

Sign up now and get the best business technology insights direct to your inbox.

I often remain quiet on this type of misinformation because it's what I've come to expect from industry groups and this is the first sign of outrage I've ever seen from someone - in the last decade - who isn't in the industry. I guess after a while I fail to be surprised or outraged.

This is really nothing. We have over a decade of industry groups like the ITAA and NFAP releasing "studies" and reports claiming vast worker shortages. They parrot CEOs and people who make these claims, but completely disregard actual data - such as employment, unemployment, and actual jobs created in the industry.

If you look at IT jobs over the last 12 years the profession has created jobs in some areas, and destroyed jobs in others. Overall, the IT employment numbers have remained rather flat over the last decade. Despite actual employment statistics, each and every BLS survey has projected rapid growth in IT and each one has so far been very wrong.

Why has the BLS been so wrong? Because the right arm is listening to CEOs and lobbyists. If the right arm of the BLS listened to the left arm - responsible for gathering empirical data - they would know that industry groups are spreading propaganda and not facts. Their own organization has the data detailing exactly what is happening yet they listen to hyperbole. I don't understand how the BLS projections can be so screwed up year after year and reporters say nothing about it. Usually reporters parrot the rapid growth projected never mind that they are never even in the ballpark.

If you really want to be angry Don, go back in time when industry was asking to raise the cap (and politicians obliged). Look at what the industry's top lobbyist at the time (Harris Miller) was saying, and then ask yourself what really happened.

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out what they said was happening and what was really happening were entirely different. It was as if they were the darlings of the corporate world (and in many cases still are) and they could say whatever they wanted without being call out on it.

This is why our country is going down the drain. Not just because of this singular issue, but because corporate controlled media is not holding anyone accountable or asking tough questions.

And Don, I hate to say it but your reporting on the matter is probably a career limiting move. Even if your current employer is supportive, I would say they are the exception. Are you getting any interviews with Indian CEOs or any CEOs from the Fortune 500 these days? If not, this is probably why. They don't want to talk to someone who will ask hard questions - and they don't need to speak with you when there are so many people willing to throw them softballs.

They see the media as part of their marketing and propaganda machine. If you aren't part of that, they have no reason to answer your calls or return your emails.

Very simple exercise Don. Open Excel. Download each of the BLS projections since 1998. Copy projections for all IT and STEM related jobs. They will have current, and then they will have 10 year projected. Using just those reports, plot what they said would happen and what actually happened. Plot where they SHOULD be right now based on projections, assuming there would be linear growth each year, and plot where they are.

Add a third column called "Difference between actual and projected" and subtract one from the other. Based on what you see, is this projection something you would make career decisions off of?

Now that you know what they said would happen and what really happen, plot a timeline. Get quotes from industry projecting all these shortages and rapid growth. Place those quotes on the timeline. Do those quotes support reality?

This is why I have such a chip on my shoulder towards the media Don. I know that you have a history of good reporting, but I truly believe you are in the minority. Are journalists afraid to report the truth? Are they too lazy to break out Excel and question what they are told? What is it Don? Why is this blog entry the first sign of outrage from the media I've ever read?

Do they need someone to tell them what to think and are they just in the business of reporting opinions? I've done the math for years - sent it off to journalists. Even if I do the heavy lifting for them and say "look at this spreadsheet" they ignore me. I have the indisputable evidence in my hand and lay it out for them and they go off parroting Harris Miller.

Of all the problems we face this one bothers me the most. Because I see the media as Democracy's watchdog. And right now they aren't doing their jobs defending democracy or holding people accountable. Without going into a tangent on the Iraq war - that is a great case in point. The government said one thing. The foreign media asked the right questions, and the American media added countdown to war clocks. Our society is broken, and the reason it is broken is because your profession is broken.

It doesn't matter what the issue is. If we don't have a media asking tough questions and demanding answers, our nation is destined for failure. When the media says things like "Rumsfeld said this" or "Bill Gates said that" they then act as if the matter is settled. It's not F'ING settled! They aren't the arbitrators of fact!

If studies are only done by industry to lobbying I don't think anyone can fix the issue. There should be some non-profit or government to do regular studies on these issues otherwise it is not helping anyone (company as well employees).

That statement alone would be fine, however there is no supportive information from an independent source or a differing viewpoint. Here is their support: "A recent Manufacturing Institute and Deloitte report underscores that. Manufacturers currently have 600,000 vacancies nationwide, it said." Once again, an industry group.

What the reporter should then do is exactly what I suggested Don do. Look at employment trends and projections and line that up with what really happened.

Essentially the link you provided was an industry article. It was 100% biased because it only covered a single side to the story.

What I find particularly annoying is that I see a pattern here. The article you sent contains a link to another article headlined "Desperately seeking Americans for factory jobs". It is another example of a single sided article - covering just one side of the story.

Here is a quote from another factory owner: ""I'm facing a real conundrum," he said. "There are so many unemployed people in the country. But I can't find the skill sets that I need. I would hire tomorrow if I could.""

Let's assume what he says is true. And I suspect it may be partially true. So many jobs went offshore that people avoided manufacturing. The appropriate follow-up question would be "ok, you say that you can't find anyone qualified. What are you doing to train people, or do you expect them to just be born with the knowledge required or for the government to train them for you?".

Industry wants to benefit from academia and our investments in education, and shift 100% of the cost of training on the workers or tax payers - who incur personal debt and must incur even more debt every time industry decides to make some drastic shift.

Look at IT. 90% of my certifications are obsolete because technology has changed dramatically over the last 15 years. Companies don't offer to pay for the annual training required just to stay current, much less get ahead. They want the benefits but they aren't willing to make an investment themselves into people. So what do they do? They go to Congress and beg for more foreign workers. They expect society to bear the cost of training and they reap the majority of the reward.

And this all comes back to the matter of journalism and their inability or unwillingness to be responsible.

I feel that industry profits from an educated society, and they need to pay far more into educating people. Most fortune 500 companies had no net taxes last year. That isn't what I call doing their part. Which journalist is holding them accountable for what they say?

For instance, Stuart Anderson's National Foundation for American Policy. Their raison d'etre seems to be to engineer deceptive "studies" that are then passed on to the American and Indian media. One can go to their website home page and see the long list of articles that they've successfully planted in various media outlets based on their one-sided information: http://www.nfap.com

The Indian media particularly goes to town with their stuff: I suspect they're the first ones to get the faxes.

Regarding the Indian media, I think that one is mistaken to give it the same level as credibility as even the American media (which as others have pointed out, isn't that credible in itself). It's not that - since India is a democracy - it necessarily means that their media is like ours. I would say that if laid out on a scale - with U.S./Canada/Brit media on one side, and communist China media on the other side - then the "Indian establishment" media would be about in the middle of the two. There's a lot of propaganda there. IMHO.

I've been engaging with these folks for, oh, 11 years now. They have always seemed to have a patter, developed somewhere and shared rapidly amongst them. I always got the feeling that someone was feeding them talking points, and they were spreading them. The same blatantly false, logically fallacious barbs kept showing up over and over again, with new ones appearing periodically. Always untrue, unfair, often defamatory against American people (especially American workers), and not uncommonly, loonytoon arguments. There was no talking to them: they lived in their own enchanted world, judging from their own press and their appearances in ours.

Well, nothing unusual in that ! Times of India is one of the leaders among India's media which had published a lot of "paid news" (read http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/greenslade/2011/feb/20/press-freedom-india ) and Times of India also had a "Private Treaties" feature by Times group's Times Medianet ( timesmedianet.com is now dissolved, read

http://celestri.org/2009/12/20/a-look-at-times-private-treaties/ ). NDTV is also known to have links to INFY. The Indian media critic site http://www.mediacrooks.com/ has a survey on the "Indian Media Crook of the Year" where Times of India and NDTV are strong contenders for the award.

Certainly, serious investors who do proper due diligence cannot be fooled, but the media is continuously being cranked

One of the more laughable examples of disinformation can be seen with this story spread by the "Public Policy Institute of California". http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9223947/H_1B_workers_are_better_paid_more_educated_study_finds

When performing the "study", apparently the Public Policy Institute of California neglected to mention the fact that they employ h-1b visa holders themselves. http://www.h1bwage.com/employer.php?q=270297&sortby=2

In order to understand what has happened to American tech workers over the last 12+ years, we need to revisit the legal concept of defamation. This goes beyond mere smacktalk, and covers the kind of falsehoods that make it hard for you to hold your head up in your community and hard to earn a living, practice your profession, and to receive the respect you should get.

How long have we been hearing about shortages, lack of skills, not keeping up skills, expecting too much money, uneducated, racism, xenophobia, lazy, etc. etc. etc.? None of which was ever true about American tech workers as a whole.

Of course the supporters of India, Inc. are saying crazy and untrue things as Don has pointed out in this particular blog entry. Of course they will say (and sometimes do) anything to keep the gravy train rolling on its tracks. That's what they've been doing for over a decade now. Nothing really new here.

It may seem as if the supporters of visa abuse have sunk to a new low, but not really. Those American readers who have suddenly found their careers in Nasscom's headlights are not surprised at all.

"With all of that clearly stated, I am absolutely appalled by the release of blatant disinformation about the job situation in the United States by Global India Newswire (GIN), an India-focused content provider based in Washington, D.C. GIN on Feb. 26 released a feature story that was picked up"

yup, that's pretty much been the pro-h-1b line all along

'you should thank us for stealing from you, we helped you by doing it'

citizen IT workers resent the insult as much as the injury, many of us came from a time when one documented lie could end your career (because the work was so important, it couldnt be tollerated). then having your career destroyed by endless lies is pretty galling.

I'm sure it was the same in the NSA, Don, if someone was proven to have lied, they could not be trusted again, you couldnt build your agency on their word

"I'm sure it was the same in the NSA, Don, if someone was proven to have lied, they could not be trusted again, you couldnt build your agency on their word"

Interesting you say that. I've heard that in another agency, CIA analysts were rewarded for supporting the powers that be while those who focused on providing factual information that didn't always jive with political winds were essentially cut off at the knees and their careers imploded.

The CIA should return to being the Central INTELLIGENCE Agency, and not the Central INTERVENTIONIST Agency. These guys are meddlers and are a bigger threat to our national security than any foreign power. They are laying the groundwork for future wars and creating an atmosphere that fosters terrorism. They feed the flames of hatred.

They need to go back to being spooks. Tell us what is happening, don't secretly manipulate what is happening. Nobody saw 9/11 coming. Big surprise there.

It just seems aweful that we don't have an open hiring system at the outsourcing companies. Instead these companies almost exclusively hire people using a visa (like 90%, here on a visa), and exclude all local candidates.

It has been plain an evident, for more than a decade, that open rampant discrimination is occuring at these companies. The fact that there is no investigation of this points to how corrupt/misinformed/unreliable the system is.

We can't let the visa system continue to be what it has become, the sole method by which companies obtain workers for jobs on U.S. soil. As I have pointed out, it is easier for a hiring manager to call HR and ask for a visa (say for someone in the overseas office, that's got be fully automated at companies like InfoSys, Oh, except for the signature apparently) than to actually do interviews (which requires other engineers to spend time away from the product development).

It is also time that we realize that by giving industry an easy crutch, in the form of these Visas, we are also damaging our competitiveness by denying many starting jobs to our local citizens and by displacing our most skilled (unfortunately more expensive) workers.

At some point, you have to realize, that haggling over pay is a distraction from the actual work. Retraining people, because they are cheap and indentured, is a distraction from the actual work. You can't allow 10/20k be the reason why the product is late or has many flaws.

It was completely different when I worked for a Japanese electronics giant. We hired many people, only about 5% on an H-1b, a few (like 3) people on L-1 from the parent company in our department. And we built billion dollar systems.

Why can't that be the relationship that we have with all foreign companies? 90% on a visa, come on that's a gaping hole in progress. If these companies even tried to hire local we'd be looking at 35% on a visa. These companies are not even trying, it's easier (maybe funnier to them, a regular racist board room laugh), to just not even try.

R Lawson, I was refering to one's immiediate team or supervisor, the rest I'm not going to comment on, beyond perhaps an analogy

In Mission Impossible, Mr Phelps might say something that is not true to outsiders during his mission. But Cinamon, Barny, or Rollin, could not lie to each other, nor could the voice on the tape lie to Mr Phelps.

How refreshing it is to read a blog post that shares my appreciation and respect for the people who come to the United States. While I share your concerns about visa abuse, I think it's tremendously important to keep perspective.

I always knew the ITAA (now tech america or whatever they go by) and NFAP were front groups. The ITAA at least made no qualms about being sold out and didn't pretend to be some think tank.

NFAP is especially nasty because they act as if they don't have a dog in the fight - as if they are some innocent think tank just trying to better society. They are trying to fatten the wallets of the people who pay them.

What I find particularly troubling is that NFAP is a 501-3(c) (non profit). So donors to this group can write off 50% of the holdings, and NFAP doesn't pay taxes. There are laws against 501-3(c) groups engaging in lobbyist work and limitations on their influence on legislation - 501-3(c) s "may not attempt to influence legislation as a substantial part of its activities".

Influencing legislation is the REASON that NFAP exists. They aren't the only group doing this - it is rather common. Groups some of the anti-H-1b proponents support may also be guilty of the same behavior (FAIR, Numbers).

I think we need to reign in these groups so long as they are non-profit, tax exempt "charitable" organizations. They have a right to speech, but there are limitations. So long as they are not paying taxes, there needs to be some transparency.

I am especially frustrated with "front groups" - or groups that pretend to be neutral voices but are in fact funded by a specific industry or company. They should not qualify as 501-3(c) organizations. And so long as they hold any tax exempt status they should be required to reveal major donors (apply the same rules that political campaigns must adhere to).

I haven't spent too much time on the "front group" issue, but after researching NFAP I have discovered just how big of a problem this is. Lobbyists are bad but Front Groups are worse because people trust them more and don't realize just who they really work for. This website allows you to quickly search on them: http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Front_groups

Very frustrating that I am not able to determine where NFAP's $$ comes from. I've read their filings. Stuart Anderson is raking in $160k+ for himself and appears to be the only person on the payroll. 2011 was not his best year... he cleared over $200k in 2010. Pays well to be a corporate whore.

I'm not sure if this study would be taken seriously seriously because it's pretty obvious that it's flawed by omitting to tell how many of the jobs have gone to Americans and foreigners. This infact indirectly helps those who are against Indian IT companies by giving them more fodder to mince and scrutinize.

The Indian outsourcing industry would shrink drastically without the help of working visas. Every Indian executive who works in one of these companies knows this. Hence, desperate acts of misinformation to lobby against the tide. The environment is very much against Indian IT outsourcing companies now due to the bad state of the economy, election season and the visa fraud cases going on. Either they have to adapt and hire more locals or face the music.

I have to agree with you there - these companies are not even trying. I've interacted with many of the them and hiring locals is the last thing on their mind. Some of the reasons for hiring through visas are:

1. More profit per billable employee: Billing rates are almost equal other consultancy firms. The employees salary though just stick to the LCA or a little bit more than the LCA

2. Easier control of the employee (hence, Jack Palmer was harder to control)

3. Variable nature of project duration and locations. These are consultancy firms and projects come in any location and for any period of time. It's easier to move around Indians who are not settled here than locals who are.

I think one of the ways to address this is to increase a state's LCA minimum wage requirements by atleast 1.5 times. This should be applicable to more H1 and L1 visas.

2. If not, the US citizens should be warned against joining third rate firms such as Infosys

3. Most corporate bigwigs in Indian media, and even many based in US have vested interest and have lot of connections to executives and investments in stocks of these firms. So Indian media and many organizations based in US will support them.

4. Can the US government and Americans raise as one unified power to make a statement against Infosys and these firms....Unless its done, this pathetic scenario will continue.

A few weeks ago, as a response to Stuart Anderson's Forbes blog titled "New Research Finds Soaring Denial Rates for High Skill Professionals" (link below), I posted in the comment section, a link to Patrick Thibodeau's Computerworld article titled "Inside visa fraud in India" (link below) - I thought the visa fraud perspective was a valid reason as to why visa denial rates are so high. My comment appeared on Stuart's blog from Sunday night until about Noon the next day (Monday) - I checked it at 7am on Monday and it was still there, but when I checked at Noon, my comment was removed. Then, I tried to post the my same comment again, but my comment never got posted - I checked for 2 days and it never appeared - So, I created a new Forbes account, using a new Gmail email address and tried to post my comment again, still it never appeared, while other folks comments got posted My comment and the link to Patrick Thibodeau's, were valid points, I didn't post anything that violated Forbes' usage policy. I guess Stuart or his Blog Admin didn't like my valid point, so they took my post down and I guess have me blocked/filtered, from posting, by my Forbes user names and my IP address

Another odd thing, I tried to post my same comment over on the "Firstpost.com" site, a couple of days before your post to that blog, for the article titled "US matching Indian babus' with flip-flop visa policy", but my comment never got posted (I tried with 2 different gmail accounts). So, my guess is that Stuart or his blog admin have some sort of connection to Seema Sirohi at Firstpost.com and they forwarded my email accounts and IP address over to her or her Blog Admin to have me blocked...

- Call me paranoid, but something seems odd there

Also, I can't believe that Forbes lets Stuart Anderson use their site to further his own (NFAP's) agenda Writing posts about his own NFAP studies..

Stuart Anderson's Forbes blog:

"New Research Finds Soaring Denial Rates for High Skill Professionals"

Oh, I forgot to mention that Stuart Anderson or his blog admin must have deleted at least one other comment for the noted Forbes blog, because a user named "weaver" posted the following, "Go ahead and delete this post again - I can re-up" in a later comment - I read the re-post of his comment and there was nothing in it that violated Forbes' terms of use...

I guess they (Stuart) didn't like the guy's post and deleted it the first time, but never blocked him from re-posting.

None of my posts to Forbes get posted. I suspect I'm banned. Not sure if the ban is related to Vivek Wadhwa or Anderson. I don't think my posts ever appear on BusinessWeek either.

You guys know my history here. I'll hit hard but I don't cross lines that routinely get crossed and published on both of those outlets. Their censorship only solidify my view that Forbes is a corporate tool - and shouldn't be considered news.

Alright Bob, you've reached your cheap shot quota But, just to squabble on some semantics...see if I can dig myself out of this

There's a difference between capitalist tool and corporate tool. I'm a capitalist and their viewpoints if manifested in law would be harmful to my economic interests. I also run a LLC - albeit a very small one. And their viewpoints would also harm my corporate interests as it may be.

So if we want to be even more accurate, I would say that they are a tool for large global corporations and represent the interests of most capitalists very poorly because most do not benefit directly from these global corporations or policies that benefit them.

R Lawson, that's a pretty good answer, and I agree. I felt the same way, and when I was winning in the late 1990s playing by the capitalism rules, and had a very disturbing feeling that I was playing against guys who never lose, and arent used to having to negortiate with anyone of my class. Guys who only believe in 'the rules of captialism' when they're winning, and believe in anything else when they're not. I didnt know how they were going to crush me, but i knew one way or another, they would. Seemed like 5 minutes later, the massive 1998 H-1b increase came, and that was my answer. I have always known H-1b was pure market tampering. (I dont see the company i was working at giving back the windfall oil profits they're raking in today, 'that's different'

People who support Infosys openly should be shocked to hear that recently this fraud firm has started applying for Green cards in EB1 category for its semi-lietrate project managers and above who are stationed in the United States. The reason they are eligible for EB1 Category is that they are with Infosys for more than 5 years, are in senior positions within Infosys and are presently working in the United States. Now I am apalled to see the blatant abuse of EB1 category by this chopshop Infosys. EB1 is a category applicable for highly skilled and professional people in the whichever field they are in. Even if it comes to IT profession only a sabeer bhatia (hotmail founder) or a ankit fadia (youngest Indian who cracked passwords in 2003) should be eligible for applying in EB1 category. Else normal people should apply in EB2 or EB3 only. Now some of you who support Infosys please pass on your judgement on whether Infosys is doing the right thing or the wrong thing.

I don't support Infosys but what they are doing is legal according current law if this is wrong then it the law which needs change. If you think Infosys is the only company then you are absolutely wrong every MNC use it or abuse it.

It is the dump law to be blamed..as long as such dump law exist such dump managers will benefit out of it.

Description: You must have been employed outside the United States in the 3 years preceding the petition for at least 1 year by a firm or corporation and you must be seeking to enter the United States to continue service to that firm or organization. Your employment must have been outside the United States in a managerial or executive capacity and with the same employer, an affiliate, or a subsidiary of the employer.

Evidence: Your petitioning employer must be a U.S. employer. Your employer must have been doing business for at least 1 year, as an affiliate, a subsidiary, or as the same corporation or other legal entity that employed you abroad.

"People who support Infosys openly should be shocked to hear that recently this fraud firm has started applying for Green cards in EB1 category for its semi-lietrate project managers and above who are stationed in the United States."

if you intend to mix both EB1 usage and B1 usage then you may want to look those two as different issues. OP concern is Infosys applying GC for people of semi-literate PMs but law doesn't look them as semi-literate with a funnel vision as the OP has.

I know a Canadian (Canadian based company) who got GC in EB1 with salary range $85K/yr (much less than what I earn)...here company had done exactly what law required. If it is not sufficient then it the law which requires fix not the company.

First of all I am not mixing EB1 GC category with B1 Visa category. I was only angered to see the kind of under-performing, usless junkies sitting in Infosys for years together getting a chance to apply on EB1 and become Green card holders in just less than a year. The law has to change else you'll find many such scrupulous people ending up being US citizens. Once such peeopl become US citizens then getting jobs for native americans will become even more difficult. Is anyone listening ?

You didn't say anything about issue in the existing law, if person with no information/knowledge about the existing flaw in the law they will assume that Infosys is doing something wrong (related to EB1...where as so far no such issue came up). So be clear what you are posting, if you are not sure better not speculate anything.

To your point of "kind of under-performing, usless junkies sitting in Infosys"

This part shows how polarized you are which brings the question of how genuine your concern is. Either you are another immigrant waiting for multiple years to get GC while those guys use EB1 route to get it faster or you are pure biased towards Infosys. Otherwise you would have pointed out every MNC (Microsoft, Google, IBM...) using EB1 route. Funny that you could only point out Infosys as if they are the only company using it.

So, according to you those under-performing and useless junkies will get job in America by competing with American Citizens????

I doubt any company wants under-performing and useless junkies and get paid in six figure salaries (don't say they go for low salary...then I would say companies deserve to get (junkies) what they pay for which is their headache).

Personally I don't like EB1 getting used for Managers but if that is what law allows it then I don't blame the companies....better go and fight for change of law with lawmakers (for sure Don is not)...I bet you do nothing but posting here because otherwise by now (its been there for 10+yrs) the law should have been corrected.

What they are accused of doing is not legal. The question isn't if they are qualified to get the visa, rather if they are using it legally. There are restrictions on the B-1 visa and what type of business activities are performed.

1) Because, EB1 category is for extra-ordinary and International managers and they should (according to my personal opinion) be earning reasonably higher salary than what normal EB2 or EB3 category resource could earn.

2) It is not only Indian companies does such EB1 category visa even Canadian companies do...which means just don't look such issue with a funnel view. If people look at a issue with open mind and eyes they can pin point exact location/reason of the issue (not like the OP who sounded like Infosys involved in another fraud).

PS: It is not to discount any fraud or illegal activity Infosys may have done. To me fraudulent/crime/racial bias are not associated with any country or company or race, it is always the individual who does it. Never blame the gun for a crime...it is the person who use it to be blamed.

Advertiser Disclosure:
Some of the products that appear on this site are from companies from which QuinStreet receives compensation. This compensation may impact how and where products appear on this site including, for example, the order in which they appear. QuinStreet does not include all companies or all types of products available in the marketplace.